“How, when, why” – a comparison of two action research methods to examine the hidden tones in annotation feedback

Ball, E; Regan, PJ

Abstract

This paper broadly confirms earlier conclusions in which action research findings identified that feedback on student assignments through annotation carried an unfavourable lecturer tone and failed to motivate the student as a learner. It was important to examine the action research process to show how a negative tone is so easily manifested in annotation. By subverting the feedback process, annotation was read as marginalia in temporary isolation of the assignment and tone was easily identified. Two different action research (AR) studies were carried out by two lecturers studying for a post graduate qualification in teaching and learning to examine annotation. One study examined annotation using participatory action research (PAR) (Marshall et al. 2011), while the other study included semi-structured questionnaires (McNiff et al 2003). This paper demonstrates how the chosen methodology can either support or restrict action research if the methods are considered ill-matched to the study. Both studies sought to answer the same question and so are in fact comparable. Therefore, the paper is as much about methodological process as it is about findings relating to annotation.

Citation

Ball, E., & Regan, P. (2013). “How, when, why” – a comparison of two action research methods to examine the hidden tones in annotation feedback. ˜The œCanadian journal of action research, 14(2), 39-50

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Jan 26, 2013
• Deposit Date: Sep 30, 2016
• Journal: Canadian Journal of Action Research
• Volume: 14
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 39-50
• Publisher URL: http://journals.nipissingu.ca/index.php/cjar/article/view/84
• Related Public URLs: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273447612_HOW_WHEN_WHY_-_A_COMPARISON_OF_TWO_ACTION_RESEARCH_METHODS_TO_EXAMINE_THE_HIDDEN_TONES_IN_ANNOTATION_FEEDBACK